ATIK Horizon 287 pounds more than ASI1600mm pro on FLO?

[Adam J]

5 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

To be fair, Olly, here we're not reviewing it. We're considering whether a camera is worth the extra 300 quid. 

And that is the thing, lets say its 10% better (whatever your measure of better is) then in my book 10% is not worth 300pounds or a 25% increase in asking price depending on how you look at it. Also I really doubt that they can make it anything like 10% better in terms of raw imaging performance, not least because they actually dont have that much experience with CMOS.

As Olly says time will tell but to be honest its going to have to be a significant difference to warrant the cost, gilding the Lilly (so not just some noise statistic an actual difference in the image that can be seen with the eye) just wont be enough to sway me. Still it will be after Christmas before I make my purchase so ill watch with interest amusing I dont pick up a second hand 8300 based camera in the mean time.

[Ouroboros]

Yes, we're comparing specs on paper, which is fine to do.  

We probably have to accept that a European designed and built camera is likely to be more expensive because of greater regional costs. Personally I think it may well be worth paying a bit more for a camera (albeit a very similar camera apparently) from a local supplier wih a good reputation.  But we'll see. I'm watching this with interest. 

[LightBucket]

I personally think the camera is overpriced, as the components are readily available, and i would have thought that Atik would have wanted to take a chunk of the market for this chipped camera, but at that price this remains to be seen....

On the positive side its a UK based company and the service if you have issues will be excellent, and easy to return and get repaired if the need arose..but i dont think for me its worth the extra money..

[Adam J]

On 26/11/2017 at 17:34, LightBucket said:

I personally think the camera is overpriced, as the components are readily available, and i would have thought that Atik would have wanted to take a chunk of the market for this chipped camera, but at that price this remains to be seen....

On the positive side its a UK based company and the service if you have issues will be excellent, and easy to return and get repaired if the need arose..but i dont think for me its worth the extra money..

Yep thats exactly how I feel, they are about 100 pounds over the amount that I would pay for the benefits of buying from a local company. 

But having said this I would point out to people justifyign the price in this way that:

1) The 460EX is £1999 from FLO and the QHY22 is £2059 from MA. Hence the ATIK is cheaper by £60

2) The 383L+ is £1659 from FLO and the QHY9m is £1449 from MA. So the ATIK is more expensive by  £210

YET: 

The ATIK Horizon Mono is £1575 and the QHY163m is £1179 from MA -- so the ATIK is £396 MORE EXPENSIVE! 

In my view its a bit of a joke and not justifiable when the price difference is getting on for twice the equivalent price difference of the similarly priced KAF8300 product.

So yes the 460EX looks like a bargain, the 383L+ is acceptably more expensive...just..but the Horizon looks like a rip off. 

 

[Ouroboros]

I've never followed the prices of astro imaging  cameras that closely, but do they tend to reduce in price after being on the market for a while? 

[Chris]

8 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

I've never followed the prices of astro imaging  cameras that closely, but do they tend to reduce in price after being on the market for a while? 

They don't seem to. The Atik Titan with it's very old tech small chip is still listed at £540, infact I'm sure it used to be £469 years ago. 

If you look at what new cameras you could get from say ZWO for that kind of money, it makes you wonder who would buy an Atik Titan?

[Ouroboros]

Yes, I suppose it's not like the latest canon SLR or Apple phone is it which are produced in bulk and initially marketed at a premium and then gradually reduced over time.